Real judgements, distilled
Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1094
An older qualification must still satisfy the eligibility rules governing the appointment sought. Here, the certificate's early date did not secure reinstatement, and rejection of eligibility should not be confused with a conclusive finding that the certificate was forged.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1095
A party benefiting from a conditional stay must meet its deposit requirement or face enforcement. The additional ₹15 crore deposit secures the pending dispute; it does not settle the land's final compensation or amount to an immediate payment to the landowners.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1093
An alleged attempt to kill does not become a lesser offence simply because the victim avoided a fatal injury. Restoring this charge means the accusation must be tried; it does not establish that the accused is guilty.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1090
For the assessment in this case, assistance reducing ordinary manufacturing costs was taxable even though the government wanted to encourage industry. The purpose and actual operation of the particular subsidy mattered more than its general development label.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1091
Proof that someone caused a serious injury does not by itself prove the additional ingredients of robbery. A court can substitute a lesser offence supported by the evidence; the sentencing reduction here depended on Appa's particular circumstances.
Special Leave Petition (Civil) · 2026 INSC 1092
Someone challenging an election must ensure that the personal-presentation requirement is met and can be proved. Merely entering the court building does not establish compliance, and a filing defect can end the challenge before the election allegations are examined.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1088
An employee who retires on 30 June may be entitled to the increment that falls due on 1 July after completing a year of service. Authorities that delay paying the amounts due must pay interest after the deadline set by the court.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1089
Recruitment must follow the qualifications stated in the advertisement and the governing Recruitment Rules. A court will not override a merit-based eligibility decision made under those rules merely because the candidate concerned was higher in the written test.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8797
A person who occupied property only because of employment has no independent right to remain once the employment and decree end. Even when a petition fails, courts can make practical arrangements to let a person recover personal belongings.
14543 more judgements for members
You're seeing the newest cases. Log in — it's free — to keep scrolling, search by name or judge, and filter by court or legal area.
Log in to see moreUnder the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, a Municipal Corporation's Standing Committee has sixteen members, half of whom retire and are replaced each year, with a new Chairman then elected by the reconstituted committee. In this case, the process of identifying the eight retiring members in April 2018 was delayed because an election "code of conduct" was then in force; once it lifted, the Corporation held a meeting on 14 June 2018 to appoint the eight new members, followed by a meeting the very next day, 15 June 2018, to elect a new Chairman. The Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) found these steps procedurally irregular and ordered that the earlier Standing Committee be treated as still existing, requiring the whole process to be redone from scratch.
The Supreme Court held that although the timeline had been compressed and the steps taken in an unusual order due to the code-of-conduct delay, the Corporation had, in substance, followed the statutory mandate: the new members were appointed on a proper proportional-representation basis as nominated by party group leaders, and the Chairman's election was genuinely conducted by all sixteen members of the newly constituted committee, not by any unauthorized body. Since no one was actually deprived of any statutory right and redoing the exact same exercise would change nothing, the Court found no justification for the High Court's extraordinary intervention, set aside the High Court's judgment, and dismissed the underlying writ petition.
Courts look at whether a procedural irregularity actually caused real unfairness or deprived someone of a right: a compressed or unusually sequenced timeline, caused by circumstances like an election code of conduct, will not by itself void an otherwise properly conducted appointment process.
